The most overused strawman on these forums: "RNG is RNG"

+5 for everything that Scrotie has said. This guy gets it. (Tip: others don't)

You don't really need to look very far to see that reward rates are an issue in PoE. Also i suggest you look at some of my edits in the post before the last post. I wrote a little secret for you Scrotie, and the last post only the second two lines were a little poetry, the first paragraph explains why you misunderstand me, and why the symptoms do relate to the cause.

There is no point in arguing against what you say now, all i would be saying was: "no, no i have pretty good intuition myself" and reinforcing that over and over, with you post after post trying to suggest i do not see what lies beneath.. I don't think you understand just how much i know what you are talking about. There is no mystery, i am just waiting for you to understand what i tell you. It doesn't lead anywhere constructive. I mean it hasn't actually occurred to you that i have been where you are with those thoughts years ago and moved past them, has it?

On a quite different note, almost contradicting what i just revealed, you cannot dismiss feedback such as: "I don't play PoE anymore because it is frustrating not getting anywhere." No, people don't know what they mean, but sometimes they actually have quite natural reactions that are not corrupted. Can you believe that!

Useless feedback is things such as: "I want upgrades to drop for me every so often", because that cannot in itself be possible unless you do some bad systems where rewards actually get better the longer you have played.

You always try to create all-encompassing theories of the world, but in doing so you neglect the duality of everything. Only in the mind are extremes in reality there are no extremes.

I mean all you have really tried to say in the many last posts is this:

"You do not see beneath the surface."

I understood what you were saying from your first post, but you never moved beyond it. When you cannot escape into "opinion" i catch you with no escape, such as was the case with the math on fireball cast on crit. You unleashed a heavily offensive attack on me in my guide saying just how wrong and confused i was so many times over till i finally got tired of it and did the math to disprove you. Your methods have not changed since except that you have opinion to retreat to. I have equal faceroll each time that stubbornness surfaces where you cannot see clearly but state your preconceived ideas, not adapting to what you have been told (not listening).

"

Saltychipmunk wrote:

that would imply what it started as was *good* there was nothing good about the old legendary system.

it was garbage , and you of all people should know it was garbage.

the bloody things had random stats RANDOM on a bloody legendary. forget how rare their drop rate was, 99% of the time one would drop it would be with mods that made no god damn sense.

and the fact that they made legendaries more common was a necessity since they are backing off of the ah. you cant have shit drops and not have a trade economy. that combination right there IS a set up for ruin.

d3 is neither d2 or poe and using the same standards on it is foolish. It isnt even pretending to be in the same vein anymore. I suggest then that we stop trying to make it live up to some lofty expectations that it failed to live up to when it launched in the first place.

I think most people here agree that D3 has serious issues with its itemization, but that's not really the context of the comparison. Even if D3 had a more complex and interesting itemization including distinctly powerful or build enabling legendary items it still wouldn't have a rewarding end-game with any longevity to it.

D3 is the prime example of a company catering to the large demographic of casual players by giving them what they asked for and it is a bad game because of it. These players wanted a more rewarding experienced so they asked for more drops, guaranteed drops, and easier access to the best quality items. End result was a game that still wasn't rewarding and despite this fact the same groups continue to make the same complaints asking for the same changes they already got once that failed to satisfy what they are actually looking for.

People say "RNG is RNG" in response to threads that try imply causation when there is no evidence of anything other than correlation. It is also a response used to shut people up when they try to whine on the forums about drop rates. I don't really have a problem with the phrase.

"

mustafa2812 wrote:

People say "RNG is RNG" in response to threads that try imply causation when there is no evidence of anything other than correlation. It is also a response used to shut people up when they try to whine on the forums about drop rates. I don't really have a problem with the phrase.

Ahhh this blasted thread again, i have no more to say but feel free to continue.

"

Cronk wrote:

Spoiler

"

f3rret wrote:

"

Isbox1 wrote:

tell me exactly why you feel RNG is RNG and what that actually means to you.

I feel that the Random Number Generator is a Random Number Generator because it generates random numbers.

What does it mean to me? It means that some numbers are random.

If you want to know I'll tell you [but i guess you don't want to know, because it's pretty common knowledge anyway].

A regular dice is 6 sided, right.

Each time you roll it, you have a 1/6 chance to roll any of the numbers.

It's not 'completely random' because the dice does not have a 7 on it. It cannot roll 83, it cannot roll 47, it cannot roll a chicken. It rolls 1-6.

So a dice roll is not 'purely' random, it is providing 'known odds' to roll a specific set of numbers.

That it might roll anything from 1-6 is the 'random element'.

But, even then, over time, the random will be 'predictable', someone rolling a dice 500 times will 'average' 3.5 per dice-roll.

Even though you cannot even roll the average. You'll never roll a 3.5.

But 3.5 is the predictable average.

So if you're fighting a monster with 350HP with a 1-6 damage weapon, you can 'confidently' 'predict' that it will take 100 hits to kill the monster, and plan for this, and this is what will happen give or take a tiny % standard margin of error.

If you then make your dice 1,000 sided - can roll anything from 1-1,000, then, suddenly, a monster with 350HP has no viable means of determining a 'confident' amount of strikes to defeat it, because the 'range' is so great without altering the desired result stat (monster HP).

One guy could still take 20 unlucky hits, where as the lucky player might just take one hit.

Because you have altered the parameters of the predictable random, you have also effected the 'confidently predictable' nature of the result.

So if everyone had to kill a 350HP monster with 1-6 weapon, everyone would have the exact same (or near as makes no difference) experience.

But if everyone had to kill a 350HP monster with a 1-1,000 weapon, everyone would have wildly differing results - it would be much more 'lottery-like' as to 'how easy' the encounter was.

Therefore, RNG in PoE is entirely the product of the 'method of implementation' and that this context of 'Random' is not the same as another method of implementing 'random'.


By simply stating RNG is RNG, regardless of 'method of implementation' - is akin to saying 'women is women' every time someone asks you if you liked your last date - it basically just suggests your someone of low intelligence.

.

Dude....


RNG (in this context) stands for 'Random Number Generator', and while the thing is naturally only pseudo-random on account of being simulated inside a deterministic machine it still stands for 'random number generator'. I mean that is just the (technical) dictionary definition.

So when I am asked what 'RNG means to me', it means 'random number generator' and not 'long pretentious expository monologue showing off how much I listened in first year Math for CS students in college'.

The word 'random' is a general one, in its base form 'random' doesn't say anything about the range of possible outcomes just that the outcome is not fixed but is placed inside of a range of possible numbers.

Also:

"

Cronk wrote:

By simply stating RNG is RNG, regardless of 'method of implementation' - is akin to saying 'women is women' every time someone asks you if you liked your last date - it basically just suggests your someone of low intelligence.

.

First off it should be 'women are women' please learn grammar. Secondly 'women is [sic] women' is not a valid answer to that question. It would be more akin to answering 'women is [sec] women' to the question: 'why do ladies always go nut when I leave the toilet seat up'.

That said, a Random Number Generator is by definition a Random Number Generator. Same way a car is a car, a bird is a bird and you're kinda pretentious.